Social Desirability and the Dissociative Experiences Scale

This study found no relationship between dissociativity and social desirability. In contrast to the assumptions of social enactment theory, the findings revealed that dissociativity, as measured by the DES, is independent of the need to respond in a culturally appropriate and acceptable manner, as measured by the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. In addition, a measure of dissociative pathology (DES-T) showed no relationship to social desirability which suggests that reports ofdissociation-related symptomatology to clinicians can be valid and not simply the result of attempts to win approval or gain attention. Both researchers and clinicians, therefore, should feel confident about using the DES as a measure of dissociation. Though regarded as the most well-respected and widely-researched of all the self-report dissociation measures, a review of the psychological literature reveals a potential limitation of the Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES: Bernstein & Putnam, 1986): No research has demonstrated that individual responses are free from the influence of social desirability. This observation led the authors to question whether DES scores are, in fact, biased by the need to respond in a culturally appropriate and acceptable manner. If so, to what extent does this confound DES research with clinical and nonclinical populations? If not, what does this imply about social enactment theory's position (Spanos, Weekes, & Bertrand, 1985; Spanos, 1994) that patients diagnosed with Dissociative 130 Identity Disorder (DID) "... are frequently unhappy, insecure people who are . . . strongly invested in presenting themselves in a way that will win their therapist's interest, concern, and approval" (p. 373)? With these questions in mind, the following study examines whether and to what extent DES scores are influenced by the tendency to respond in a socially desirable manner. A Definition ofSocial Desirability Several definitions of social desirability have been stated. Without knowing how this construct is defined for this study, this difference in definition can create some confusion in interpreting the results. In general, social desirability has been used in the literature to refer to a manner of presenting oneself in a favorable light (Crowne & Marlowe, 1960) . Although initial investigations were mainly interested in whether such a response set biased the results of self-report questionnaires, recent investigations have focused on the development, validity, and reliability of various social desirability measures. These include the Edwards' Social Desirability Scale (Edwards, 1957), the Jackson Social Desirability Scale (Jackson, 1984), and the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (MCSD; Crowne & Marlowe, 1960). With few exceptions, these investigations have described the traditional conceptualization of social desirability as failing to take into account different motivations behind the need to respond in a socially desirable way. For instance, in their factor analysis of the Edwards, Jackson, and Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scales, Holden & Fekken (1989) determined that social desirability can be reduced to two dimensions. The scales are not mutually exclusive since each measures both dimensions, but loads more highly on different aspects of social desirability. One measures the "tendency to present the self in a favorable light" (p. 245; specific to the Edwards and Jackson scales), and the other measures "the tendency to give socially approved responses" (p. 245; specific to the Marlowe-Crowne scale). As this study is concerned with the tendency to give socially approved responses, the authors deemed the MarloweCrowne definition as most relevant. Specifically, Crowne & Marlowe (1960) define social desirability as the need to "... obtain approval by responding in a culturally appropriate and acceptable manner" (p. 352). DISSOCIATION, Vol. IX, No. 2, June 1996